Here’s a quote I found interesting. I don’t know who the author is:

“If we cannot fix our 70,000 failing bridges and roads, and we have
millions of hungry kids and elderly folks, and we have no money to help
veterans and the disabled, and we have the most expensive healthcare
systems in the world, and almost anyone can be fired from his or her job
for any reason, BUT we have more than $800 billion for the very rich in
tax subsidies and breaks every year, and more than $600 billion for the
defense budget, then who the hell is our military protecting except the
very rich who are robbing us and the world every day?�

On 8/17/2015 6:53 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
$800 billion for the very rich in tax subsidies and breaks every year,

Which rich are these?

Are they the top 1% that pay 45.7% of all federal income taxes?

I'm sure it's not the bottom 60% that pay only 2% of all federal income
taxes.
60% of the people pay only 2% of the taxes, sounds like progressive heaven.

Just not fair is it.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/13/top-1...ome-taxes.html

I've been paying 1% to less than 3% federal income tax for many years,
it's not really fair, but I'm not complaining. My two deductions and
college expenses moved out, so my taxes will be going up.

Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 07:53:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

BUT we have more than $800 billion for the very rich in
tax subsidies and breaks every year

Maybe you would like one of the flat tax guys.
When Forbes ran the numbers a few cycles ago, he showed a 15-19% flat
tax with no loopholes was harder in the rich than the thousand page
tax code we had at the time.
If you believe the hype, it is better for them now than when the flat
tax was proposed.
With a good sized exemption, I am not sure why it wouldn't work.
The problem comes from all of the special interests who thrive on the
tax code the way it is.

I would do away with rich people and corporate welfare this morning if
I was king. That is usually just the payback for a huge bribe. hmmm
"contribution"

On 8/17/2015 12:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 07:53:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

BUT we have more than $800 billion for the very rich in
tax subsidies and breaks every year

Maybe you would like one of the flat tax guys.
When Forbes ran the numbers a few cycles ago, he showed a 15-19% flat
tax with no loopholes was harder in the rich than the thousand page
tax code we had at the time.
If you believe the hype, it is better for them now than when the flat
tax was proposed.
With a good sized exemption, I am not sure why it wouldn't work.
The problem comes from all of the special interests who thrive on the
tax code the way it is.

I would do away with rich people and corporate welfare this morning if
I was king. That is usually just the payback for a huge bribe. hmmm
"contribution"

What corporate welfare would you start with?
Mikek

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:35:44 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 8/17/2015 12:00 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 07:53:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

BUT we have more than $800 billion for the very rich in
tax subsidies and breaks every year

Maybe you would like one of the flat tax guys.
When Forbes ran the numbers a few cycles ago, he showed a 15-19% flat
tax with no loopholes was harder in the rich than the thousand page
tax code we had at the time.
If you believe the hype, it is better for them now than when the flat
tax was proposed.
With a good sized exemption, I am not sure why it wouldn't work.
The problem comes from all of the special interests who thrive on the
tax code the way it is.

I would do away with rich people and corporate welfare this morning if
I was king. That is usually just the payback for a huge bribe. hmmm
"contribution"

What corporate welfare would you start with?
Mikek

Tax breaks for companies that moving jobs offshore.
Tax breaks for executive "perks". That should be reported as ordinary
income.
Eliminate a vast number of the federal subsidies given to fund things
that do not make sense but are just politically popular..

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:18:22 -0400, wrote:

Eliminate a vast number of the federal subsidies given to fund things
that do not make sense but are just politically popular..


===

Good luck attacking the pork barrel.

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:32:40 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:18:22 -0400, wrote:

Eliminate a vast number of the federal subsidies given to fund things
that do not make sense but are just politically popular..


===

Good luck attacking the pork barrel.

Isn't that the major problem with the government doing anything?

As long as politicians direct the government and they take massive
amounts of money from big companies, pork will always be where most of
the money goes.